Will government, academic, economic, and industry leaders be changed or impacted by an ISE dynamics, social/cultural boundary and borders flexibility?

Will the ISE be as disruptive (more or less) to society/culture, governments, academics, economics, and industry as 1900...2000 digital and telecommunications information technology ... hardware and software?

Closing Statement from Adelo Vant

Presently valuable information is lumped together in an information pile by most, but not all folks. IOW: Human gnome information for most folks is like all outer information not very useful. In the future as metadata/structure is added to information far more people will discover and use available information for presently unknown and unique purposes.

Legal mandates by governments or societies will be a waste of time, like the present war on drugs, the past prohibitions on booze and sex, and the concerns on printable guns. I like a few others (are not nihilist) expect the future will be far better, because information discovery and use will be uncontrollable by any means, and information application controllable by all folks. Maybe government will eventually be pure DEMOCRACY, which should scare the heck out of the powers that be presently.

May 12 2013:
Yes. But unfortunately by default rather than visionary design or cultural imperatives. Human intellectual capacity is now known to be "neuroplastic" in nature. This is so profound that it provides an answer to crush something like racism forever. It says that regardless of our appearance there is a dynamic at work in each individual in which he or she grows intellect in the form of "wiring" in the brain in response to challenges placed upon the brain in which people grow access to unused grey matter. No one is sentenced by race to be more or less than anyone else. Education demand reform on this criterion alone. It is never that people should be written off as incapable--it is only that they are unready at a given time. Motivation must become the horse in front of the cart of learning whereas until now learning has been in from of the horse of motivation. Why should education be viewed as an expense and children viewed as liabilities when that could be flipped around entirely to make education an economic profit center where motivation, autonomy and conduits for cooperation invite our progeny to shape the world they will inherit. It is only because we have drawn wrong assumptions and institutionalized dysfunction and set ourselves up as the standard by which young folk are to be judged. Well, we haven't done very good jobs in a lot of areas need to question if we are holding back an extraordinarily rich source of economic stimulus.

May 13 2013:
First Thanks, I have been keeping up a little on neuroplastic brain development. Together with the on-coming Information Society Environment (ISE) for didactic learning and global culture change “a fall from hubris” is very likely for the “Powers That Be” today, unless the “Powers That Be” want to move on with the rest of US, EU, RU, CN … folks. With “Powers That Be” attempts at disruption and oppression, it still looks like early next century culture. I will hope for much sooner, I am +60yo/BBG.

May 13 2013:
The powers that be will be a powerless that those who dismissed the automobile as a fad when someone delivers a product that illuminates and circumvents institutionalized dysfunction. Kids already text each other under their desks. Why not build a model that embraces cooperation through technology? The powers that be are all products of systems the were devoid of social development imperatives and formal models. So like the automobile they will be skeptical. But if done in such a way as to energize student motivation it would become one of those things like surrendering to the inevitability that your barn must be converted into a garage. I think we're so wrong about ourselves that some of what we call attention deficit syndrome could actually be solved with facilitation of motivation and autonomy rather than medication and a slap with a yard stick. It may take a long time to achieve the kind a of surrender to progress "d like to live to see but a lot will happen in the 21 st Century that will be good. I'm 57 and may not witness it. But I believe in people overcoming wrong eventually.

As more people have devices avaliable to allienate them from other people, there will be less use for governments other than as a regulating function. If I could use a robot or could purchase items on line and have them delivered to my home at an affordable price, (or build them with a printer device), I'd probably never leave home. This means less fuel used for transportation by individuals and growing fuel inventories. If I could print my own food and water from simple amino acids to my liking, it means less farming and other agricultural facilities.

In short, we may have to regulate how fast technology progresses, in order to prevent the wholesale collapse of a system of trade and social regulation to keep from dissolving into social chaos.

May 3 2013:
In my opinion, we haven't even begun to scratch the surface of the cultural/socio impact of tech. We don't even have the language to discuss the impact that our tech ability will reveal. The 'farming' of genetically reproduced replacement bodies, 'downloading' personalities to whomever, customized children, who 'owns' what, what are 'rights'. Disruptive? 'Unrecognizable' is probably closer.

Apr 23 2013:
One thing that is inevitable as far as cultures are concerned is dynamism. The interaction between cultures (diffussion of ideas being an example) brings about changes, whether it is thought to be perceptible or whether it is thought to be subtle.
Governments and other social institutions are helpless against these changes, like a boulder rolling down a steep slope.

Sometimes our ignorance of history makes us think that there is this massive, outlandish (or better still, out of space) change going on in the world.
Information has always created social change, and so has technology.

Will a 2000s information culture / economy create more disruption or less disruption to the status quo of the 1900s technology society / economy?

Can / Will information be distributed and controlled by the laws and economic models of the 1900s? Will the (IMO) Information Society Environment brake the global / social / family / government / dogma ... cast-mold of the 1700s...1900s?

May 16 2013:
There is a sort of daunting over-choice that is present with all the technology. People have all this readily information available from the internet at their fingertips. A result of this is a subconscious anxiety. People being anxious and intimidated from this over-choice choose to stick to a habitual action and have a safe ground of familiarity. This explains why people route to social media kinds of things. Technology also parallels to people brains. Because technology makes tasks shorter, people can accomplish a reward with less effort. With sort of positive reinforcement operant conditioning, mixed with generalization learning people will believe short cuts make rewards quicker. People develop this idea into every day tasks and everyone slowly becomes lazy because they know the minimum effort to make themselves feel rewarded. This may not be all true but this is just my take on how our culture slowly became as an effect of technology.

May 22 2013:
Readily discoverable and available information at the fingertips on the internet is not possible today.

Social media as presently modeled is an everything-bin for whatever. Social media websites of the future will be far more focused communities with common and specific information interest.

Technology is a tool. Information is the sustenance for communities, activities, collaboration, synergy ... the brain. IOW: A national science information archive has a paper on warp-bubbles, but can you or most folks interested find the subject paper for reference, discussion, or reading? Answer: No

In the near future, about +10 years, the whole (or parts) community with interest in any subject will have immediate availability of associated information for collaboration and resultant derivatives / synergy.

In an Information Society Environment (ISE) cultures will change, because information is instantly discoverable and available, not the ubiquitous background technology.

May 8 2013:
Technology has very little meaning as compared to information. They are complementary.

Fact is, the two go together. For most of my lifetime, the internet was impossible. The net did not exist. Cell phones were adult toys for the super rich. The rest of us had to sit by our land-line telephones and worry because our kids were still not home at 1 hour past curfew. Only the super-rich could get a cell phone for their kids! If I could, I'd tattoo a cell phone to my kid's arm and NOT provide for an off-button. There would be an auto-answer feature like an answering machine (no voice mail). My dis-embodied voice would proclaim: "Hey kid! I want your posterior HERE, at home, on the couch in front of me! You've got 20 minutes to get here or I call the cops and tell them you and/or your buddies stole my car!" And I'd want the volume loud enough to make sure that ALL his friends heard that message too! Now THAT would be some useful technology!

But seriously: Information DOES create social change. But technology contributes significantly to our ability to receive and achieve information. And that process, in turn, is a major driver of the fundamental information exchange that makes technological innovation possible. The two go together.

May 7 2013:
I see technology as a potentially significant tool in the enrichment of society. It seems that too many people see technology as a new theology. I find this troubling. Is there a need for another world religion? Consider. Do most people look at technology rationally? Lines forming at midnight to buy the newest phone does not really attest to rational behavior. Neither does the hours spent by people worshiping at the altar of Facebook, posting on walls not unlike people at the wall of the temple in Jerusalem and with the same fervor. Technology has become a religion. Of course, there is freedom to form religions in this country.
But, does society need a tool or a religion?
Yes, technology has the promise to give us better and longer more fulfilling lives, but I see it as millions of worshipers
telling the world that they are going to the market in 140 characters or less.

May 2 2013:
More or less depends on when privacy issues are addressed. Before BigDogmaBro dejure exploits and enslave privacy to products and services or after BigBizBro dejure consumes more privacy (theft of property) for profits.

Science and technology are good, but S&T applications by BigDogmaBro government, private, and religious institutions are damnation for US, EU ....

May 12 2013:
Ok. But aren't u using current social constructs (Bigbiz/Dogma) to describe a future structure we cannot, as yet, envision? These potential technologies are outside the realm of current ethical/legal precedent/consideration. What is 'privacy' when we're not sure a genetically farmed body double has rights, or a convicted criminal eligible for 'download' can refuse? The trinkets of info access for medical and entertainment value will be the 'tells' for the powers that be of what's possible. But we cant know what that looks like. My point is that our moral and ethical abilities must evolve - as quickly or quicker - than the incentivised BigBroDogma currently has unreservedly under the guise of competitive progress. This, to me, has incalcuable socio/cultural ramifications, regardless of how 'good' tech is. I am not a 'restrictionist' for science and tech, but we're not just making 'tools' anymore as a humans, we're transforming as a species.

Apr 30 2013:
Information Society Environment? What is that? About the only thing technology has accomplished is to allow people to forward ridiculous ideas as though they were credible. Ideas now form out of thin air with no basis in fact, and never any pretense of academic rigor.

May 1 2013:
Information Society Environment (ISE [iz-ee]): Global information presence and access. Information presence and access in a society requires the information have meta-tags placed in a registry for information discovery and recovery by all members and systems of the community / society.

ISE analogy: The year is 1985 we shop at books and record stores, theaters and news stands for prepackaged information collections [Dang, I got stuff I don’t want]. The year is 2010 we shop at online businesses for stories and music, movies and news collections of personal information [Dang, How do I get what I want]. The year is 2035 we shop for specific things we know exist or we hope exist [Fycken Magic, I have the information I want, when and where I need].

I suspect 2020 is more likely for Fycken Magic, but to get to the ISE period information and computer science, society and laws need to innovate and change far faster. In the Fycken Magic ISE age a person with ailments will have sensors in cloths/skin that can initiate a call for an ambulance when they are in an accident. Ambulance medical diagnostics (xMRI, BP/P, Blood) will auto update personal medical records, the PCP, and doctor on duty at the ER will be consulting on your injuries and treatments prior to your arrival at the hospital. Early intervention … early out and home.

Apr 30 2013:
Part of what we are starting to see—and will see more of—is that there is a universal maximum on the curve of information-technology's impact. People are moving from idea to idea and paradigm to paradigm faster and faster to feed the addiction for novelty, and the result is that the potential applicability of claims in a given paradigm is not being tested out in meat-space. The impact is that hope of change and optimism about potential disruption will accelerate, but actual progress on the ground will slow toward 0, and without competition among paradigms in anything more than a virtual arena, the evolution of infrastructure and superstructure will be stunted. The biggest change will be the decline of change - except within the system to support the novelty-stream of the armchair rationalists.

May 1 2013:
A dystopian society in an entropic universe actually progressing will slow toward zero. Sounds like only gods and heroic leaders (like Marvel/DC super heroes) will be able to save or enslave US, EU, all others. (IMO) Zero is a concept number expressing the unknown or absent as well as the unmeasured and/or unwanted, but never will zero express nothing. Zero indicates we are forced or decide to ignore something important.

Sometimes the number “0” and/or negative numbers are used to express the problems or unimportance by foolish people. The value or vector relative to other values or vectors can always be set as equal to zero. So, in some weird way for me “0” is always the starting point for everything in time and space.

Information or technology is the topic. Information Technology (IT) impact and advancements are always proportional to available information. More information means more technology, science, engineering, learning, application, innovation, synergy …. Technology, opinion, humor … are not the problem, but a distraction (some more fun than others). Information is not the problem. (IMO) Information availability and application could be part of the solution or problem.

Humans without reliable (best factual available) information will use fantasy, dogma, mythology information to explain anything and everything. Maybe eventually schools will teach students to seek reliable information to form ideas and opinions about themselves, family, friends …and the universe.

Armchair-rationalists or Dogma-drunks are not the same. The rationalist is sane (rational), the dogmatist may be insane (irrational). A qualified (PhD) scientist has methods/facts for reasons. A certified (PhD) scientist has an agenda/dogma for opinions.

Apr 29 2013:
Information Technology provides infrastructure and applications to people. Information (data/content) is the material that traverses the infrastructure and manipulated by the applications. The information as a material is a raw usable commodity when available.

I agree technology is and has changed our culture, but information as the commodity (not the technology) needs many more tools (XML ...) to make the information discoverable and available to everyone, everyplace at any time for an ISE.

IOW: Presently technology creates social change and information application and/or available, much public information is not discoverable or obtainable. Information creates social change and technology application becomes focused on discovery and availability of information. What you cannot (discover/obtain) know cannot help social change.

Apr 27 2013:
ya bro information is a diguise for knowledge and knowlege is a disguise for wisdom. we have a bunch of wisdom out there right now but its being desguised by lots of information. wich is good because it protects us from knowing too much too fast. yay!!!!!!!

Apr 29 2013:
IMO: Information (data/content …) is a material commodity that may or may not be available to acquire for personal knowledge. Explicit information is documented (oral traditions included) and applied (the textbook example). Implicit information is experiential (hands-on) application of explicit information with curiosity about results or intent to produce a specific result, and knowledge confirmation and acquisition are collateral results. Implicit knowledge has limited use, because it is not distributed or readily available by explicit documentation.

Knowledge is frequently trivia for people to regurgitate at appropriate social occasions. Personal knowledge acquisition by a person is highly certifiable. Knowledge when used to exploit a social, economic, or personal weakness may be a crime, and will always indicate a pitiable human condition. So, for me IMO, there is no wisdom in knowledge. Applied knowledge for personal reasons may or may not show wisdom, and may expose personal character. Information availability for knowledge acquisition is essential to all endeavors (knowledge application), there is never too much. Also, information used as dogma is knowledge for exploiting social, economic, and personal weaknesses by politicians, clergy, plutocrats and other hubris filled fools. Dogma has no acceptable application.

Apr 29 2013:
i agree knowledge in itself is useless. same with information. only when its combined with love and is built upon a foundation that cant crumble will it then be of any use to anyone. it can be harder to find the light in things that have a ton of information. when i say light, its also like the good, or whats going to make us better from that. love guides to what that person needs if, theres too much then it can be difficult to sift through all that to get to what is needed. so love and a strong foundation and we got somewhere to stand and go.

Apr 25 2013:
My dad always says that 'information will be the next form of currency'. I don't truly get the statement yet, but I'm sure I will -- one day.

I think the main eyebrow-raiser here is the open availability of information and how readily compact it can be. Portable to the extent that if a disk is stolen, thousands of people are at risk of being taken to the cleaners.

Information availability, you mentioned, is a critical part of my question.

You may be interested in something US, UK and others are doing with learning material online. USA education petition http://wh.gov/eEaI may be appropriate for US, EU ...?

Now, back to Information availability and currency, Information as a material is always a commodity in every culture (IMO). Presently the information is put in publications (hard-copy and virtual) and audio-visual presentations (like music and movies) we buy. In the USA education (URLink above) learning materials are becoming a big part of that Information Society Environment (ISE).

How can we make all information available to everyone globally? How can someone that speaks/reads only Spanish learn from a book that maybe is only in Russian, while they are on vacation in Japan, all while listening to some great fusion-jazz using bagpipes, sax, base and Taiko drums? Presently, there just ain't no dang way to affordable find/discover all those things and bring them together for one person, in one place, for one time.

Science, technology, and folks still need to get more creative/innovative. Open and available ISO (like *.odt), W3C (like XML), OASIS (like QUOMOS) standards will help some. Also, http://www.gutenberg.org, www.edx.org, www.coursera, and many others people and things will make the information material affordable and available to everyone. Heck, even kids attending school in a small farm community in Vietnam and at the moon colony will have access to the same great teachers and information material ... plus the games, music and movies after completing homework. But, how do we make it easy and affordable for everyone is the currency and economy of the future (maybe).

Apr 23 2013:
IMO
1500s...1900s, The printing press "applied technology" made society / culture change.
2000s...Until, The Information Society Environment (ISE) "applied information" makes society / culture change. Today information about the printing press is essential to rendering to paper / screen information on request. The virtual (information), I think, does not diminish the importance of printing, but does (potentially) add exceptional value to the quality of life on earth and where we settle next. We now have technology (G4 Tablets) in our hand that allows access to learning and information on a scale not considered a decade ago.

What will be more disruptive to culture in this century; The access to information needed or the ubiquitous technology?

Information Technology application IMO was the disruptor of the last century.
Information Data / Content application IMO is the disruptor for this century.

The century behind us technology was the more culturally / socially disruptive. I suspect, the century we are now in will be culturally / socially disrupted far more significantly by information discovery, availability, sharing, collecting / mining, aggregating, analysis, collaboration, innovation, synergy ... and application. Hence, the concept of Information Society Environment (ISE) where technology complies with the ISE requirements (family, friends, needs, workplace and home automation, robotics, learning, entertainment ...).

IMO, the last century was dominated by "Technology" application (industrial...telecommunications). This century will be dominated by "Information" application (learning, entertainment ...). If correct, then the next hackers/geeks will more likely be librarians, information scientist .... Nothing to say about global economics, products, markets, sales, laws ...?

The disruption will be significant but not bad, I think, if we can keep information "Open and Available" for innovation and sharing. The software and genetic patents IMO would be legacy methods restricting innovation and economic growth.

Apr 23 2013:
Your question is related to the video put up on the TED Blog this morning, the debate that opened TED 2013. Two scholars argue about whether the century behind us was the more disruptive or the century we are now in.

Apr 23 2013:
Information application in this century, I suspect, will be more disruptive than the technology application of the past century.

So what makes the proportional difference in social / cultural disruption when (1900 & 2000) compared in 2100+? I guess, they will say information application in the2000s day-to-day (physics, medicine, engineering, farming, Sol-system exploration / pioneering ...) made proportionally far more human advancement possible than technology application of the 1900s.

IOW: 2000s Information is the cause of culture, science, technology ... advancement, and the 1900s Technology is the cause of culture, science, and information advancement.

Apr 23 2013:
Thank you. I am sorry to have bothered you. Even with the dumb-downed version of your question I still do not know what you are asking. It is probably best to proceed without me. I'll just go look for a coversation about what constitutes happiness.